Thoughts about AI, Part 1

 Thoughts about AI, 1

In the 2026 book “The God Test”, by Michael Wright, the proposition of Artificial Intelligence, AI, being an evolutionary force of a magnitude the human species has never encountered before. He believes that AI is going to create the most abruptly significant social transformation for human beings in history.

At the time of this writing, I have not read the entire book, but I have had numerous initial thoughts about what the era of AI means for humanity and am writing some of them down partly to help organize them in my own head, partly to see how my initial thoughts compare to Wright’s, and partly to have something to share with students, friends, and colleagues since this conversation will be continuing for years to come. 

I often think about the human need and demand for technology; most students tell me this means the more obvious computer and electronic related devices, and other machine/hardware devices. The word technology, to me, is rather broad, and matches what one finds with a quick ask of Google: the practical application of scientific knowledge to achieve goals, solve problems, and simplify daily life. It includes physical tools and devices, but also software and systems and processes (a good example is something like an assembly line or infrastructure like an electrical grid, computer network, distribution networks, and so on). Technology in the modern era dominates entertainment, leisure, and communications, and has simplified life to the point where one does not have to move from a couch to survive, with the possible exception of going to the bathroom on occasion. It is staggering to think about how much any number of technologies has simplified life. 

But how did this all happen, fundamentally? I started thinking about Wright’s statement in the first couple pages of The God Test, that technology is directional through time. For human ancestors, going back on order of a million years or so, there was no true science, certainly not in the modern sense of the term. So what does technology mean for our ancient ancestors, the precursors of modern Homo sapiens? We’re going back to sticks and rocks as tools and weapons, logs used as tools to roll heavy objects so they could move them, wood and animal skins to build shelters and clothing. Fire. Whenever the first seeds were purposely planted for the first crops, dug into the ground with sticks. And some of those same logs and sticks eventually were discovered to float, and the first rafts were invented. These are examples of their technologies, and these were necessary not to make life easier necessarily - it was about survival.

Survival of the fittest. Now this is a connection to the fundamental force of Nature that all of life as we know it is directed by - evolution. 

If the original technologies discovered/invented/developed by human ancestors were for their survival, then evolutionary forces were responsible. All living things try to survive. That is primal and primary. Survival, so they can reproduce and maintain the species from extinction. This is the essence of life on Earth, and every animal, plant, single-celled organism, and bacterium is at the mercy of evolutionary processes, and how they can adapt to a given environment. 

As early humans then dispersed out of Africa and into a larger variety of different environments, new challenges for survival existed. Groups of humans became isolated from others. As generations passed, with more and more migrations and more isolated groups, separate ways of life evolved. Different languages. Different beliefs and ways of thinking. Different cultures and religions that formed based on what was being observed and the challenges that affected life for each group. And as groups grew in number, more and more natural resources were being used. Societies formed as numerous individuals lived together, and rules were needed. Civilizations evolved over time, always with the need for survival guiding how different groups developed new technologies and ways of living that were appropriate for the challenges of their environment. 

And sometimes, through traveling, different groups of people ran into other groups of people, who had entirely different life styles, traditions, beliefs, cultures, languages, and technologies. Evolution is fundamentally about survival, and if one group did something that threatened the way of life and survival of the other group, violence results. The advent of war is, in my thinking at least, the result of evolutionary forces and pressures on groups of people. And who tends to win wars? Those with technologies appropriate for scaring others away, or appropriate for eliminating the threat through killing. 

Survival of the fittest. 

The industry of developing machines and methods and strategies for winning wars evolved, and continues to evolve - to the point where it is one of the largest pieces of a nation’s economy and culture and tradition. Of course, even within a single group of people, there are conflicts that result in violence, as individuals are trying to maintain their way of life. 

Evolution is built around competition for survival, meaning humans are competitors by nature. Fight or flight. Survival in order to perpetuate the species, and as family structures developed, one needed to maintain a life where offspring survived and carried on the family name. Competition. In life. For individual and family honor. For natural resources. For technologies that helped make survival easier. For wealth, and land, and homes, which required resources. And for many, having wealth typically means having power. 

Survival of the fittest. Competition. To many humans, the ‘fittest’ are the wealthy, and the wealthy are the powerful. This has become a natural piece of nearly all cultures adn their governments, over so many generations, and of course is at the core of how nations are run, survive, and compete with others. And it drives economies, as well as technological development and ownership.